• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 40,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Way Over the Top - 21x21x21 Cube

Status
Not open for further replies.

BrandonSky

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2013
Messages
22
YouTube
Visit Channel
Screen Shot 2013-09-16 at 12.08.09 AM.jpg CLICK ON LINK TO VIEW IMAGE
This is the Way Over The Top Cube. It is a 21x21x21 Rubik's Cube; larger than the world record Over The Top 17x17x17 cube by M.Oskar Van Deventer. There are 2646 stickers on it. The 21x21x21 cube has 6.3 quingendoquadragintillion possible combinations.
Here are 10 questions for YOU to answer by replying:
1. Would such a puzzle be possible to make (The rubik's company could not make a 6x6 cube or larger because the corners would stick out too much when you turned a side 45 degrees)?
2. Would it be perfectly proportional (like on <5x5 cubes and the X cube 7), edges elongated but flat (like on a Shengshou 9x9), or would it be pillowed (like a V cube 7)?
3. Would it be possible to turn (Oskar's failed prototype of his Over the Top 17x17x17 cube was impossible to turn. If you tried to turn it, the cube would pop)?
4. Would it turn well and not have pops and lockups when the layers catch on themselves (The Pillowed 9x9 turns horribly, the Shengshou 9x9 turns much better)?
5. How would you take it apart (The retooled Rubix 5x5, when first bought, is almost impossible to take apart)?
6. What age would children start solving this puzzle (PeteTheGeek's video on the Shengshou 9x9 the box showed "Ages 14+" and "Skill Level: 6 Stars")?
7. Should it be tension adjustable and use screws, or not adjustable and be protected by rivets (The V cube 5, 6, and 7 used rivets, but the new V cube 4 is adjustable and uses screws)?
8. How long would the pieces go in to the puzzle (Oskar's Over The Top 17x17x17 cube, the center pieces go very far down into the puzzle)?
9. Should the stickers be tiles or vinyl stickers, should the stickers have a logo on them, and should the cube be DIY or assembled (The 17x17x17 cube comes in pieces from Shape ways)?
10. How much would it cost (Oskar's Over The Top 17x17x17 cube costs $1600 on the Shape ways website)?

And I could not post this in the right forum because I could not post in the Puzzle Mods forum.
 

qqwref

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
7,834
Location
a <script> tag near you
WCA
2006GOTT01
YouTube
Visit Channel
View attachment 3118 CLICK ON LINK TO VIEW IMAGE
This is the Way Over The Top Cube. It is a 21x21x21 Rubik's Cube; larger than the world record Over The Top 17x17x17 cube by M.Oskar Van Deventer. There are 2646 stickers on it. The 21x21x21 cube has 6.3 quingendoquadragintillion possible combinations.
I don't think so. A real 21x21x21 would not have all the cubies the same size, unless you have some completely new mechanism idea (which I doubt).

1. Would such a puzzle be possible to make (The rubik's company could not make a 6x6 cube or larger because the corners would stick out too much when you turned a side 45 degrees)?
Possible? Yes, just like the 17x17x17 was. But just like the 17x17x17 it would be huge, fragile, hard to turn, and expensive, and have very large outer layers.

2. Would it be perfectly proportional (like on <5x5 cubes and the X cube 7), edges elongated but flat (like on a Shengshou 9x9), or would it be pillowed (like a V cube 7)?
3. Would it be possible to turn (Oskar's failed prototype of his Over the Top 17x17x17 cube was impossible to turn. If you tried to turn it, the cube would pop)?
4. Would it turn well and not have pops and lockups when the layers catch on themselves (The Pillowed 9x9 turns horribly, the Shengshou 9x9 turns much better)?
Both "edges elongated but flat" and "pillowed" are options. However, I think the "edges elongated but flat" type would be significantly easier to turn and have fewer pops/lockups, just like on the 9x9x9s and 17x17x17s. I note that a pillowed puzzle tends to be very hard to align.

5. How would you take it apart (The retooled Rubix 5x5, when first bought, is almost impossible to take apart)?
7. Should it be tension adjustable and use screws, or not adjustable and be protected by rivets (The V cube 5, 6, and 7 used rivets, but the new V cube 4 is adjustable and uses screws)?
You would probably have to unscrew one of the centers to take it apart. On a puzzle with this many pieces, I'd definitely not risk trying to pry a piece out, no matter how loose it is. And for that reason, you'd definitely want screws.

6. What age would children start solving this puzzle (PeteTheGeek's video on the Shengshou 9x9 the box showed "Ages 14+" and "Skill Level: 6 Stars")?
Ridiculous question. Age is irrelevant. However, I certainly wouldn't recommend trying to solve a real 21x21x21 unless you have a lot of patience and are already an experienced bigcuber.

8. How long would the pieces go in to the puzzle (Oskar's Over The Top 17x17x17 cube, the center pieces go very far down into the puzzle)?
As with the 17x17x17, some pieces will go all the way to the center of the puzzle, but other pieces should only go a little into the puzzle to make it more stable.

9. Should the stickers be tiles or vinyl stickers, should the stickers have a logo on them, and should the cube be DIY or assembled (The 17x17x17 cube comes in pieces from Shape ways)?
Stickers are the choice of the puzzle creator. But nobody is gonna make a 21x21x21 in a factory somewhere and assemble it for you - whoever buys it will have to either assemble it themselves or get a friend to do it.

10. How much would it cost (Oskar's Over The Top 17x17x17 cube costs $1600 on the Shape ways website)?
A quick and dirty estimate: $1600 * (21^3 - 19^3) / (17^3 - 15^3) = $2500.
 

MWilson

Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Messages
288
Obviously edited image.

The bottom left 3x3 is completely different looking shade of orange than the rest.
The 3x3 groups above it all have the same exact lighting on the stickers.
Same with the 3x3s to the right, all the same lighting.
The rest of the 3x3 groups are just a few different ones pasted around.

Maybe it's supposed to be a "this is what it might look like if it were real". Is someone actually trying to pass this off as a real photo?
 

Nathan Dwyer

Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2013
Messages
170
Location
Fort Wayne, IN
WCA
2011DWYE02
It's obvious that no one read the whole post. the point of the post was to ask hypothetical questions about the puzzle, not to say "Hey look i made this puzzle!". It's obviously not really a fully functional 21x21 in the picture
 

Dapianokid

Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2013
Messages
214
I read both of the big posts, qq.
I think this size cube is a bit ridiculous except for to build a bigger cube than Oscar did. I could see it being plausible if it were easily accessible and solvable (easier than Oscar's!)

I find my Rubik's brand 4x4x4 much more challenging than a SS simply because it's a worse quality cube! The 21^3 cube would be discrouaging and not worth the fun of the challenging bigcube.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top